Arguments from Expert Opinion – An Epistemological Approach

In Catarina Dutilh Novaes, Henrike Jansen, Jan Albert Van Laar & Bart Verheij (eds.), Reason to Dissent. Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Argumentation. College Publications. pp. 403-422 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In times of populist mistrust towards experts, it is important and the aim of the paper to ascertain the rationality of arguments from expert opinion and to reconstruct their rational foundations as well as to determine their limits. The foundational approach chosen is probabilistic. However, there are at least three correct probabilistic reconstructions of such argumentations: statistical inferences, Bayesian updating, and interpretive arguments. To solve this competition problem, the paper proposes a recourse to the arguments' justification strengths achievable in the respective situation.

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Probabilistic Arguments in the Epistemological Approach to Argumentation.Christoph Lumer - 2011 - In Frans H. Van Eemeren, Bart Garssen, David Godden & Gordon Mitchell (eds.), Proceedings of the 7th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Rozenberg; Sic Sat. pp. 1141-1154.
On a razor's edge: evaluating arguments from expert opinion.Douglas Walton - 2014 - Argument and Computation 5 (2-3):139-159.
Why Arguments from Expert Opinion are Weak Arguments.Moti Mizrahi - 2013 - Informal Logic 33 (1):57-79.
Arguments from authority and expert opinion in computational argumentation systems.Douglas Walton & Marcin Koszowy - 2017 - AI and Society 32 (4):483-496.
Argument schemes—an epistemological approach.Christoph Lumer - 2011 - Argumentation. Cognition and Community. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), May 18-22, 2011.
Some Artificial Intelligence Tools for Argument Evaluation: An Introduction.Douglas Walton - 2016 - Argumentation 30 (3):317-340.
The Epistemological Theory of Argument--How and Why?Christoph Lumer - 2005 - Informal Logic 25 (3):213-243.
Why Arguments from Expert Opinion are still Weak: A Reply to Seidel.Moti Mizrahi - 2016 - Informal Logic 36 (2):238-252.
The Legitimacy Crisis of Arguments from Expert Opinion: Can’t We Trust Experts?Yanlin Liao - 2020 - Argumentation 35 (2):265-286.
You Will Respect My Authoritah!? A Reply to Botting.Moti Mizrahi - 2019 - Informal Logic 39 (1):106-122.
Maurice A. Finocchiaro: Meta-argumentation: An Approach to Logic and Argumentation Theory: Studies in Logic series volume 42, College Publications, London, 2013, viii + 279 pp, Softcover £12.00, €14.00, $19.00, ISBN: 978-1-84890-097-4. [REVIEW]Dale Jacquette - 2014 - Argumentation 28 (2):221-230.
Arguments from Expert Opinion and Persistent Bias.Moti Mizrahi - 2018 - Argumentation 32 (2):175-195.
When expert opinion evidence goes wrong.Douglas Walton - 2019 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 27 (4):369-401.
Appeal to Expert Opinion: Arguments From Authority.Douglas Neil Walton - 1997 - University Park, PA, USA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
Throwing the Baby Out with the Water: From Reasonably Scrutinizing Authorities to Rampant Scepticism About Expertise.Markus Seidel - 2014 - Informal Logic 34 (2):192-218.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-10-13

Downloads
207 (#93,445)

6 months
50 (#81,612)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Christoph Lumer
University Of Siena

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references